Pope sends direct message to Ben

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm crying into my copy of 'D!ck sees Spot run' now.

That you kept from Grammar school?

[Ben Kenobi]

If Ben only talked about things he understood his posts would consist entirely of basic astronomy facts and Catholic dogmas.

Which is two more than Gribbler.

[Ben Kenobi]

Not three months ago, BK failed basic English grammar. That he's not good with the rules of an obscure old-person card game is not that big of a deal by comparison

Elok:

English doesn't use the imperfect tense

Kenobi:

Yes it does.

You were wrong then and still wrong now. Asserting that you're 'right' when you were wrong is just plain ignorance.

[Aeson]

I have many fond memories of playing rook with my siblings. This thread has ruined that for me ... thanks Obama

[The Mad Monk]

...okay, so who's up for some cribbage?

[giblets]

If Ben only talked about things he understood his posts would consist entirely of basic astronomy facts and Catholic dogmas.

[rah]

Then he shouldn't have used it as an example to make a point. Which is all that I said. But yes, not a surprise.

[Elok]

Not three months ago, BK failed basic English grammar. That he's not good with the rules of an obscure old-person card game is not that big of a deal by comparison.

[MikeH]

Nikolai's link suggests that if you are using aces, they are high, so it's even more confusing.

[MikeH]

Yeah. It absolutely made no sense. I assumed he was mangling a bridge term too.

[rah]

Somehow I think jury rigging a regular deck to accommodate the lack of a real rock deck just makes his comment more obscure. I never questioned the truth of his statement since I have never played rook and had to look it up myself. My claim was that if he's trying to make a point using a reference that it should be one that people might recognize and not from an obscure game that even he admitted those here might not recognize. But again, when he responds he doesn't say that he should have used a difference reference, he said I should have understood the concept (Which I said I did in my post, which as always he ignored) Just another of his twisting so he doesn't have to admit that he might have used a better reference instead of one that was confusing to those not familiar with Rook.

But I do find it hilarious that a standard rook deck doesn't have aces.


Yeah, and that too Mike. Which is why I originally asked him what the heck did that even mean.

[MikeH]

Christ Rah, are you so ****ing dense that you can't ****ing parse the concept that trump beats no trump? Or are you just spooning your usual bull**** that nobody really gives a **** about? You do this every goddamn post.

The main problem with

7 No trump loses to the trump ace everytime.

Is that most people would think a 7 would lose to an Ace, because in most games Aces are high.

[Nikolai]

I call BS on you lame ass attempt to explain your moronic post...
In the special deck for rook, there are no aces, just numbered cards (1 - 14) and the rook card.
So the expression you used makes no sense for Rook either.

Now you will probably try to worm you way out by saying something like "well if you use a regular deck of cards to play instead of a rook deck, there are aces" but that still doesn't explain why this would be a common rook "expression" since rook decks don't have aces.

But heck, it's sure nice to see what an expert you are on a game you play.

Never heard of rook, but wikipedia claims you can play rook with normal cards, and specifically mentions the aces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rook_%28card_game%29

Kentucky Discard Rook may be played with standard playing cards by removing the 2s, 3s, and 4s from the deck, playing Aces high, and adding one joker to be used as the Rook Bird card. When playing with such a deck scoring changes as follows: each 5 is worth 5 points, each ace and 10 is worth 10 points, and the joker is worth 20 points. Aces always play high in tricks.

[molly bloom]

65 year old women. Christ.

Ah, so Roman Catholics were soft on old heretics were they ?

The Guises discovered the plot and the rebels were defeated and butchered at Amboise. The torturings and hangings went on for a week and the bodies hung on the castle walls and on trees. It was suspected, though never proved, that the Prince de Condé, of the Bourbon family, had been behind the uprising.

Francis II died at the end of 1560. He was succeeded by his younger brother, Charles IX, and Catherine de Medici, the queen mother, took over as regent. In 1562, anxious not to drive the Huguenots to desperation and also to curb the power of the Guises, she issued the Edict of St-Germain, which allowed Protestant services to be held, though only in private and not in towns. A few weeks later, however, Huguenots worshipping in a barn outside a place called Vassy were massacred by the Duc de Guise and his men.

http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/catherine-de-medici-signs-edict-amboise

In all that massacring and torturing, do you imagine anyone stopped to ask for a birth certificate ?

See also Alva in the Spanish Netherlands, and the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre, the expulsion of the Jews and Moriscos from Spain, and the three Inquisitions...

[molly bloom]

Only 31 that we know the names of (not counting Foxe's book) were executed under Mary. That's it.

Oh Sister Bendy, are you sure ?

In less than four years 277 persons were burned to death. Some, like Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, were men of influence and high position, but the majority belonged to the lower orders.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09766a.htm

That's from the Catholic Encyclopaedia, by the way. Ho ho ho....

Elizabeth killed 42 named Catholic nobles, more than Mary, fwiw.

Name them. Provide the list, or remain a liar.


Now about the Catholic 'martyrs' you claimed Henry VIII killed which stemmed from your acceptance as truth of

a book review on a catholic website.

While I was re-reading 'The Roots Of Evil : A Social History Of Crime And Punishment' by Christopher Hibbert, I happened upon this :

How many criminals were hanged in all during these years (the 16th Century) cannot be ascertained. The quoted figure of 72 000 as given by Stow for the 37 years of the reign of Henry VIII is ill-founded, but there is no doubt that Bishop Rowland Lee, as Lord President of the Council in the Welsh Marches, 'hanged thives in hundreds, right and left'...

So the 'ill-founded' figure is not for Catholic martyrs or victims of the Pilgrimage of Grace or its aftermath, but an inflated inaccurate figure applied to all found guilty of hanging offences.

Poor dim trusting you.